Class forces, transition and the Arab uprisings: a comparison of Tunisia, Egypt and Syria

Abstract

This article intervenes into an ongoing debate on authoritarian regimes in the Arab world following the uprisings of 2011, in particular addressing the perceived failure of those uprisings to bring about 'transition' to liberal democratic models. Drawing upon the method of comparative historical sociology used in seminal analyses of democratization and dictatorship in Europe, Asia and the Americas, the article seeks to explain the varying trajectories of the Arab Uprising states in terms of several structural factors, namely the balance of class forces, the relative autonomy of the state and the geo-political context. The article provides an empirical comparison of the cases of Egypt, Tunisia and Syria as points on a continuum of outcomes following the Arab uprising. The article mounts a critique of the absence of class analysis in mainstream transition theory and hypothesises instead an important role for workers' movements in bringing about even basic elements of liberal democracy. The empirical comparison is shown to support this hypothesis, demonstrating that in Tunisia, the state where the worker's movement was strongest a constitutional settlement has been reached while Syria, the state with the weakest and least independent workers' movement has descended into counter-revolution and civil war: the case of Egypt lying between these two poles.

Understanding regime divergence in the post‐uprising Arab states

“…Aschar (: 152‐99) observes that they constituted the real alternative to the other two main post‐uprising contending forces, the military/state establishment and Islamist movements, both of which stood for variations of the neo‐liberalism against which the uprisings initially mobilized. The marginalization of organized workers during the Uprisings in Syria, Libya and Yemen was a factor in both state failure and democratic failure (Allinson, ). Where workers movements were, as a result of greater industrialization, larger and better organized, as in Egypt and Tunisia, they played key roles in anti‐authoritarian mobilization.…”

Beyond Structure and Contingency: Toward an Interactionist and Sequential Approach to the 2011 Uprisings

“…In the interior of the country, associations linked to the regime and the UGTT union, whose central leadership seemed to be tied to the regime, were spared. 54 However, local union cells were 'abeyance networks' for various opponents and, at the end of the 2000s, never failed to participate in the local protest movements. 55 When the mobilization spread, grassroots members pulled the union's leadership into the protest.…”

Religion and Revolution: Theorizing of the Arab Spring in Accordance With the Selectorate Approach

“…They control the army, occupy the political positions, and manipulate the economy. For instance, Hafez al‐Assad's brother‐in‐law controlled around 60% of Syrian economic activities (Allinson, ). The Syrian uprising broke out to rectify the economic situation and abolish inequality and dictatorship.…”